R
rajm11
this is going too farhave a productive convo I request -->Operamaniac THE ADMIN
-
Amazon Deals - ToS - Warp
NIXI root cause for implementation of <<<***FUP***>>> by all major Indian ISP's
- Thread starter indactxxx
- Start date
- Replies 34
- Views 8,208
mehrotra.akash
Regular
Quick question from the 1st post:If ISP's get a rebate for outgoing data, and charged for incoming data, why not increase upload speeds, and modify plans to include a customer rebate for outgoing data as wellVirgin Mobile had something like that where you get paid to receive calls from non Tata numbersMaybe something of the sort: Billed Data= Downloaded Data - Uploaded Data/2 or something like that
mgcarley
Founder, Hayai Broadband
Quick question from the 1st post:
If ISP's get a rebate for outgoing data, and charged for incoming data, why not increase upload speeds, and modify plans to include a customer rebate for outgoing data as well
Virgin Mobile had something like that where you get paid to receive calls from non Tata numbers
Maybe something of the sort: Billed Data= Downloaded Data - Uploaded Data/2 or something like that
In some cases it's a matter of technology (ADSL maximum upload speeds are significantly less than the download speeds, which matters mostly because most of the country runs on ADSL networks), in others it's a matter of the difficulty of billing that - this "rebate" only counts for NIXI traffic, while the traffic which goes over the international pipes - which is a much larger percentage of the total - doesn't incur the "rebate".
Besides, even at the future rate of Rs10/GB, even if the incoming😱utgoing ratio is 2:1, the price per GB is still significantly above that of the international bandwidth anyway, so rewarding customers for an increase in their upload traffic doesn't really have any tangible benefit for anybody and may also lead to an increase of either malicious, "illegal" p2p, or other traffic which may violate the T&C set by the ISP (such as running webservers).
The reason Virgin could get away with this is because of their direct parity in pricing from Tata traffic - Virgin's termination fees were higher than Tata's, and since they could easily tell that the traffic is coming from Tata's network because it would come in over a single link, they could give that reward. Unfortunately, it's not so easy with the Internet due to the inherent nature of it being a giant mesh.
If ISP's get a rebate for outgoing data, and charged for incoming data, why not increase upload speeds, and modify plans to include a customer rebate for outgoing data as well
Virgin Mobile had something like that where you get paid to receive calls from non Tata numbers
Maybe something of the sort: Billed Data= Downloaded Data - Uploaded Data/2 or something like that
In some cases it's a matter of technology (ADSL maximum upload speeds are significantly less than the download speeds, which matters mostly because most of the country runs on ADSL networks), in others it's a matter of the difficulty of billing that - this "rebate" only counts for NIXI traffic, while the traffic which goes over the international pipes - which is a much larger percentage of the total - doesn't incur the "rebate".
Besides, even at the future rate of Rs10/GB, even if the incoming😱utgoing ratio is 2:1, the price per GB is still significantly above that of the international bandwidth anyway, so rewarding customers for an increase in their upload traffic doesn't really have any tangible benefit for anybody and may also lead to an increase of either malicious, "illegal" p2p, or other traffic which may violate the T&C set by the ISP (such as running webservers).
The reason Virgin could get away with this is because of their direct parity in pricing from Tata traffic - Virgin's termination fees were higher than Tata's, and since they could easily tell that the traffic is coming from Tata's network because it would come in over a single link, they could give that reward. Unfortunately, it's not so easy with the Internet due to the inherent nature of it being a giant mesh.
Quick question from the 1st post:
If ISP's get a rebate for outgoing data, and charged for incoming data, why not increase upload speeds, and modify plans to include a customer rebate for outgoing data as well
Virgin Mobile had something like that where you get paid to receive calls from non Tata numbers
Maybe something of the sort: Billed Data= Downloaded Data - Uploaded Data/2 or something like that
Because there is a general trend to download download and download..This is what we are trying to halt through fibernet.
Sole Aim of last plan of Fibernet was To help people host content on their computers and then peer with ISPs on our terms.
If ISP's get a rebate for outgoing data, and charged for incoming data, why not increase upload speeds, and modify plans to include a customer rebate for outgoing data as well
Virgin Mobile had something like that where you get paid to receive calls from non Tata numbers
Maybe something of the sort: Billed Data= Downloaded Data - Uploaded Data/2 or something like that
Because there is a general trend to download download and download..This is what we are trying to halt through fibernet.
Sole Aim of last plan of Fibernet was To help people host content on their computers and then peer with ISPs on our terms.
mgcarley
Founder, Hayai Broadband
to mgcarley- my post #6 remains unanswered.
To be honest, I don't have an answer to that question. Maybe the tedium of the Indian legal system, I don't know.
Because there is a general trend to download download and download..This is what we are trying to halt through fibernet.
Sole Aim of last plan of Fibernet was To help people host content on their computers and then peer with ISPs on our terms.
It is true that most consumers download significantly more than they upload but I'm not sure that it answers either question - he's asking about why don't ISPs provide rebates on traffic etc.
Basically it would be somewhat possible but not really easy nor beneficial to anyone... it the same questions were asked when we started talking about the Hayai Zone: there's no way of guaranteeing that the traffic (ESPECIALLY torrent traffic) will go through the IXP to get from A to B, and consumers would end up getting confused expecting much larger "rebates" than they would actually be eligible for as a result.
As for Fibernet, it will not be able to peer (as in peering) without all the license malarchy that has been discussed both here and in other threads (and I've posted the rest in a Fibernet thread).
To be honest, I don't have an answer to that question. Maybe the tedium of the Indian legal system, I don't know.
Because there is a general trend to download download and download..This is what we are trying to halt through fibernet.
Sole Aim of last plan of Fibernet was To help people host content on their computers and then peer with ISPs on our terms.
It is true that most consumers download significantly more than they upload but I'm not sure that it answers either question - he's asking about why don't ISPs provide rebates on traffic etc.
Basically it would be somewhat possible but not really easy nor beneficial to anyone... it the same questions were asked when we started talking about the Hayai Zone: there's no way of guaranteeing that the traffic (ESPECIALLY torrent traffic) will go through the IXP to get from A to B, and consumers would end up getting confused expecting much larger "rebates" than they would actually be eligible for as a result.
As for Fibernet, it will not be able to peer (as in peering) without all the license malarchy that has been discussed both here and in other threads (and I've posted the rest in a Fibernet thread).
To be honest, I don't have an answer to that question. Maybe the tedium of the Indian legal system, I don't know.
u should form a small association and meet/complain to bodies like CCI and then go to courts if needed.😛ositive:
u should form a small association and meet/complain to bodies like CCI and then go to courts if needed.😛ositive:
mehrotra.akash
Regular
Ohk..
Basically I was imagining it as, since most people leech, with uploads set to 1-2kBps
If they get some rebate instead of getting charged for uploads, they could seed properly as well
Would help their ratios and also the ISP
But, yeah there's no easy way of making sure the traffic passes through NIXI
From NIXI homepage:
[*]The policy should encourage domestic Content being hosted out of India: This is the only way Indian ISPs can insist on Peering with their western counterparts rather than paying hefty transit charges to them. This will result in the overall lowering of cost of bandwidth in the country.
[/list]I used to think locally hosted content would be better as latencies and dependancy on international networks would reduce
Basically I was imagining it as, since most people leech, with uploads set to 1-2kBps
If they get some rebate instead of getting charged for uploads, they could seed properly as well
Would help their ratios and also the ISP
But, yeah there's no easy way of making sure the traffic passes through NIXI
From NIXI homepage:
[*]The policy should encourage domestic Content being hosted out of India: This is the only way Indian ISPs can insist on Peering with their western counterparts rather than paying hefty transit charges to them. This will result in the overall lowering of cost of bandwidth in the country.
[/list]I used to think locally hosted content would be better as latencies and dependancy on international networks would reduce
mgcarley
Founder, Hayai Broadband
to mgcarley- my post #6 remains unanswered.
u should form a small association and meet/complain to bodies like CCI and then go to courts if needed.😛ositive:
I think there are a couple already, but how far they get in such matters is... yeah.
Ohk..
Basically I was imagining it as, since most people leech, with uploads set to 1-2kBps
If they get some rebate instead of getting charged for uploads, they could seed properly as well
Would help their ratios and also the ISP
But, yeah there's no easy way of making sure the traffic passes through NIXI
This is a people problem as well.
Moreover, in no instance is an ISP inclined to help it's users pirate material. Period.
From NIXI homepage:
[*]The policy should encourage domestic Content being hosted out of India: This is the only way Indian ISPs can insist on Peering with their western counterparts rather than paying hefty transit charges to them. This will result in the overall lowering of cost of bandwidth in the country.
[/list]
In this case, "out of" should read "from" or "within".
Indian ISPs already peer with their Western counterparts - All of the big International suppliers peer in Singapore, US West Coast, US East Cost, HK, London and Palermo (among other places but these are some of the more major transit points), but the International transit charges still need to be paid for the cable systems by one party or the other so there's still that cost involved, and the peering at the other end is really an irrelevant cost - $1/mbit or often less in most of those places.
One of the problems that I've noticed in India is similar to that of NZ. Where Telecom NZ owns 51% of the only cable that touches NZ soil, Bharti, Reliance and Tata all own the cables which touch Indian soil, which allows them to set a price according to their needs and make it somewhat difficult for anyone to really price them out - there is no impartial 3rd party that owns these systems, unlike the cable systems in Europe or the US - and the result is often anti-competitive pricing for wholesale bandwidth (which is only recently FINALLY being addressed in NZ).
In my case, any one of those companies could easily decide to offer their bandwidth at Rs10/GB as it seems may be the case very soon and put pressure on our margins etc. We're aware of this which is why we have to out-service them. On the other hand, in (for example) the US, Level3 and Global Crossing don't compete in the retail space - they provide carrier-grade bandwidth only and that's all they do. They can't really set a high price for one player and a low price for another as is the case here. In the European cases (and NTT) the countries concerned have extremely strict anti-monopoly rules and rules on competition but the ISP businesses and wholesale businesses are completely separate, with different AS numbers and everything, which again is not really the case here.
I used to think locally hosted content would be better as latencies and dependancy on international networks would reduce
I think it would. The challenge is getting the content here to begin with.
u should form a small association and meet/complain to bodies like CCI and then go to courts if needed.😛ositive:
I think there are a couple already, but how far they get in such matters is... yeah.
Ohk..
Basically I was imagining it as, since most people leech, with uploads set to 1-2kBps
If they get some rebate instead of getting charged for uploads, they could seed properly as well
Would help their ratios and also the ISP
But, yeah there's no easy way of making sure the traffic passes through NIXI
This is a people problem as well.
Moreover, in no instance is an ISP inclined to help it's users pirate material. Period.
From NIXI homepage:
[*]The policy should encourage domestic Content being hosted out of India: This is the only way Indian ISPs can insist on Peering with their western counterparts rather than paying hefty transit charges to them. This will result in the overall lowering of cost of bandwidth in the country.
[/list]
In this case, "out of" should read "from" or "within".
Indian ISPs already peer with their Western counterparts - All of the big International suppliers peer in Singapore, US West Coast, US East Cost, HK, London and Palermo (among other places but these are some of the more major transit points), but the International transit charges still need to be paid for the cable systems by one party or the other so there's still that cost involved, and the peering at the other end is really an irrelevant cost - $1/mbit or often less in most of those places.
One of the problems that I've noticed in India is similar to that of NZ. Where Telecom NZ owns 51% of the only cable that touches NZ soil, Bharti, Reliance and Tata all own the cables which touch Indian soil, which allows them to set a price according to their needs and make it somewhat difficult for anyone to really price them out - there is no impartial 3rd party that owns these systems, unlike the cable systems in Europe or the US - and the result is often anti-competitive pricing for wholesale bandwidth (which is only recently FINALLY being addressed in NZ).
In my case, any one of those companies could easily decide to offer their bandwidth at Rs10/GB as it seems may be the case very soon and put pressure on our margins etc. We're aware of this which is why we have to out-service them. On the other hand, in (for example) the US, Level3 and Global Crossing don't compete in the retail space - they provide carrier-grade bandwidth only and that's all they do. They can't really set a high price for one player and a low price for another as is the case here. In the European cases (and NTT) the countries concerned have extremely strict anti-monopoly rules and rules on competition but the ISP businesses and wholesale businesses are completely separate, with different AS numbers and everything, which again is not really the case here.
I used to think locally hosted content would be better as latencies and dependancy on international networks would reduce
I think it would. The challenge is getting the content here to begin with.
mgcarley
Founder, Hayai Broadband
^ pacnet was going Ga-Ga over their new cable/WAC i guess to India and how they will help dropping bw charges by 70%? have u contacted them, they were to begin 2012.
It's opened a new International gateway in Chennai in May, but no new cable, although I *believe* it now has the rights to build one.
It's opened a new International gateway in Chennai in May, but no new cable, although I *believe* it now has the rights to build one.